The ‘good food’ movement transforms food labeling

What do we mean by the Good Food Movement? “The Food Movement. In a nutshell, encompasses the many people across America who have become passionately engaged with how their food is made and where it comes from”. Steve Armstrong | Oct 01, 2018

The reason we’re having this conversation is because like the terms ‘natural’ and ‘healthy, ‘good food’ and ‘clean labels’ mean different things to different people. It truly is a case of the value being in the eye of the beholder. ‘

Food manufacturers and regulatory agencies find this approach chaotic, That’s because they don’t really have any guidelines for translating consumer expectations about a food product onto its corresponding label,

That’s why there’s talk about a new “Process Label” As food production and consumption has become more complex, consumers have driven demand for food certifications. We have organic, GMO Free, Gluten Free, Cruelty Free and the list of 626 types of food certification labels goes on. You don’t need a scorecard, you need an app.

Consumers may not always know what’s in their best interest when it comes to convenience eating, but there are certainly enough of them to make traditional food brands like Campbell’s crumble and reorganize.

They and other processed food giants are finding it increasingly difficult to source new supply chains or retool processes to match the speed and depth of consumer self and planetary interests.

Steve Armstrong takes us on a deep dive into the morass of complexities confronting producers, regulators and consumers. Caveat Emptor!

According a new report from Label Insight and the Food Marketing Institute (FMI), grocery shoppers exhibit loyalty to products that create deeper relationships through information exchange,.

The Transparency Imperative report found that shoppers increasingly demand transparency and a closer connection to their food, so much so that 75% are more likely to switch to a brand that provides more in-depth product information, beyond what’s provided on the physical label. When shoppers were asked the same question in 2016 in a similar study by Label Insight, just 39% agreed they would switch brands.

Cultured Meat Symposium Unveiled

Gathering for a confab about whether synthetic meat produced in labs offers a real promise for feeding populations in sustainable ways.Mystery meat is taking on a 21st century twist. Have it whose way?
→ Read full article

Jo Craven Mcginty tells the back story about those ginormous birds with the steroid like breasts. There’s more than meets the eye, and that’s the point of the article when it comes to our food and our food system. Check out Why Your Bird Weighs More.

Happy Thanksgiving turkey and tofu lovers everywhere. If the size of your bird peaked your interest, here are a few other interesting facts to talk turkey about.

The most comprehensive definition of whole grain termed to date has been published this week in the journal Food and Nutrition Research. The effort to create the definition, which is intended to assist in the production and labeling of foods rich in whole grains, was born of the HEALTHGRAIN EU project, the largest project ever focusing on cereals and health; and was led by a multi-disciplinary team from some of Europe’s leading universities and food research institutes.

Historically, there’s been no complete, legally endorsed definition of whole grain flour and products,” explains Jan-Willem van der Kamp, corresponding author of the paper and Senior Officer of International Projects at TNO Food and Nutrition. “Most supermarkets today are stocked with foods that originate from many different countries. When you read ‘25% whole grain flour’ on one product label; the same claim on a different label could mean something quite different nutritionally. If use of this definition is adopted broadly, this inconsistency eventually would cease.”

The HEALTHGRAIN definition is the next step in reaching a precise, common understanding of what constitutes whole grain in food products – from breads to pasta to breakfast cereals – regardless of where they originate, adds van der Kamp.

Almost universally, the term whole grain indicates inclusion of all three components of the cereal grain kernel – endosperm (this is the largest part of the grain and provides mostly starch), germ (comprises only a small part of the grain; this is where sprouting begins) and bran (the grain’s protective outer layer; it is rich in dietary fibre). Variances, however, arise around the particular grains considered “whole”, precise combination of the three components once processed, and processing practices which can affect the resulting flour’s nutritional value. The HEALTHGRAIN definition addresses all three of these issues detailing a permitted list of grains and “pseudo grains” (such as quinoa and amaranth) and processing guidelines that take into account current milling practices.

The need for developing a more comprehensive, detailed whole grain definition was identified during the course of the HEALTHGRAIN EU project, an initiative intended to increase the use of whole grains and their health protecting constituents in food products for improved nutrition and health benefits. The expansive project has involved everything from research to better understand specific health benefits of whole grains to exploration of new ways to get products high in their healthy compounds onto the market.

The HEALTHGRAIN definition was developed by a committee led by van der Kamp, representatives of the Swedish Nutrition Foundation; DPR Nutrition Ltd., UK; and VTT and University of Eastern Finland; in cooperation with a multidisciplinary group of nutrition scientists, cereal scientists and technologists, plant breeders, flour milling specialists and experts in regulatory affairs from throughout Europe.

The article with the complete HEALTHGRAIN definition, including the permitted grains, can be accessed in the current volume of Food and Nutrition Research (http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/view/22100).

According to the lawsuit, in response to the groups’ requests for information “documenting, analyzing, or otherwise discussing the physiological, psychological, and/or behavioral effects” of ractopamine, the FDA has only produced 464 pages out of 100,000 pages that exist. Worse, all 464 pages have already been released.

What ever happened to transparency? Truth in advertising? Or truth in labeling? How much more cash will be spent convincing the residents supporting Washington’s I-522 initiative that they can’t know if there are GMO’s in their food?

We’ve allowed the conditions to exist and proliferate which result in toxic impacts of human and environmental degradation, suffering and death for far too long. By what values and authority do we condone, maintain and preserve a system of regulations with minimal or no protection for human life? It the only choice really profit for some and suffering for all?